Cited by 143Death Anxiety and Social ExclusionSocial and Intergroup PsychologySocial Power and Status Dynamics

Self-Affirmation Among the Poor: Cognitive and Behavioral Implications

Hall, Crystal C., Zhao, Jiaying, Shafir, Eldar·2014·Psychological Science

Abstract

The poor are universally stigmatized. The stigma of poverty includes being perceived as incompetent and feeling shunned and disrespected. It can lead to cognitive distancing, diminish cognitive performance, and cause the poor to forego beneficial programs. In the present research, we examined how self-affirmation can mitigate the stigma of poverty through randomized field experiments involving low-income individuals at an inner-city soup kitchen. Because of low literacy levels, we used an oral rather than written affirmation procedure, in which participants verbally described a personal experience that made them feel successful or proud. Compared with nonaffirmed participants, affirmed individuals exhibited better executive control, higher fluid intelligence, and a greater willingness to avail themselves of benefits programs. The effects were not driven by elevated positive mood, and the same intervention did not affect the performance of wealthy participants. The findings suggest that self-affirmation can improve the cognitive performance and decisions of the poor, and it may have important policy implications.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0956797613510949

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Additional support for groups such as FSM students may signal that their group has historically underperformed and thus induce threat.

    “it may signal to them that their group has historically underperformed and thus induce threat (Hall, Zhao, & Shafir, 2014;House of Commons Work and Pensions Committee, 2004;Kissane, 2003;Lens, Nugent, & Wimer, 2018;Leslie & Mayer, 2014;Sahota, Woodward, Molinari, & Pike, 2014).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hall, C. C., Zhao, J., & Shafir, E.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
  • Princeton University (US)
Venue
Psychological Science
Published
2013-12-19
Volume
25
Issue
2
Pages
619-625
ISSN
  • 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9280
OpenAlex
W2110929177
Cited by
143
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
7.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
Keywords
self-affirmation, poverty stigma, low-income adults, executive function, fluid intelligence, cognitive performance, positive mood, social stigma
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Intelligence, Male, Middle Aged, Poverty, Psychotherapy, Random Allocation, Self Concept, Executive Function, Social Stigma

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review